V. K. SINGHAL, J. ( 1 ) THE order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dated August 22, 1996 has been challenged in this appeal for the assessment year 1992-93. ( 2 ) THE assesses has purchased husk from unregistered dealer which was used as a fuel in the preparation of the food articles and is liable to tax under Section 6 of the Karnataka Sales Tax act, 1957. The Tribunal found that the explanation to Section 6 under the Karnataka Sales Tax act is not existing under the provisions of the Kerala and Tamil Nadu Acts, and therefore, the decisions given in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes), Ernakulam v. Hotel Liberty [1988] 69 STC 54 (Ker) and P. C. Balaramaraja v. State of tamil Nadu [1994] 94 STC 212 (Mad) are not applicable. ( 3 ) THE following question of law is raised : "whether on the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case, purchase tax under Section 6 of the Act is leviable in respect of the husk purchased from unregistered dealers which is used as a fuel in the preparation of food and drinks and, whether there is an element of consumption of the husk used as fuel as per the provisions of the explanation to Section 6 of the Act ?" ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the interpretation which is given by the apex Court and by the Tamil Nadu High Court with regard to the word "consumption" there cannot be any consumption unless the said item has been made as ingredients of the finished goods. ( 5 ) ARGUMENTS by both the learned counsel for the parties heard. ( 5 ) ARGUMENTS by both the learned counsel for the parties heard. ( 6 ) PROVISIONS of Section 6 are as under : "levy of purchase tax under certain circumstances.--Subject to the provisions of Sub-section (5) of Section 5, every dealer, who in the course of his business purchases any taxable goods in circumstances in which no tax under Section 5 is leviable on the sale price of such goods, and (i) either consumes such goods in the manufacture of other goods for sale or otherwise or consumes otherwise, or disposes of such goods in any manner other than by way of sale in the state, or (ii) despatches them to a place outside the State except as a direct result of sale or purchase in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, shall be liable to pay tax on the purchase price of such goods at the same rate at which it would have been leviable on the sale price of such goods under Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Explanation.--For the purpose of this section 'consumes such goods in the manufacture' shall include goods consumed for ancillary purposes in or for such manufacture. " In the case of P. C. Balaramaraja v. State of Tamil Nadu [1994] 94 STC 212 (Mad), it was held that "it must be as raw material or component going into end-product, charcoal used as fuel for manufacture of cement, paint, was not considered liable to purchase tax". In this case the decision given in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes), Ernakulam v. Thomas Stephen and Co. Ltd. AIR1988 SC 997 , 1988 (34 )ELT412 (SC ), JT1988 (1 )SC 631 , 1988 (1 )SCALE569 , (1988 )2 SCC264 , [1988 ]3 SCR248 , [1988 ]69 STC320 (SC ) was relied on, where, the cashew shells used for ancillary purpose like fuel in the process of manufacture were held as not consumed and the word "consumption" was interpreted to mean that it must be in the manufacture as raw material or of other components which go into the making of the end-product. ( 7 ) UNDER the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, before the insertion of the explanation, there could have been no levy on purchase tax under Section 6 if there was no consumption of the goods in the manufacture of other goods,. e. , if the fuel itself was not consumed in the manufacture and was not a component or part in one form or other. But the explanation provides that "consumes such goods in the manufacture shall also include goods consumed for ancillary purposes in or for such manufacture". The ancillary purpose would be for burning as fuel and, therefore the definition as under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act are hot relevant. The decision given thereunder cannot be relied upon. Under Karnataka Sales Tax Act goods can be consumed for manufacture. Use of fuel is for manufacture of goods. ( 8 ) THIS Court in the case of Vengamma Trust v. State of Karnataka [1994] 93 STC 207, has considered the liability of purchase tax on purchases of kerosene and diesel from unregistered dealers and upheld the levy. ( 9 ) IN view of this decision, we feel that the Tribunal has not committed any illegality in upholding the liability of purchase tax. Petition is accordingly dismissed.